Posts by Sean Cruz

I have to admit, casualtiger2, you’d make quite the politician. :klap:

As for those jabs at the liberals and conservatives over on Philosophy, I’d suggest you hold back on comments like that moving forward. They can easily be taken the wrong way—especially that bit about certain "reds" bringing up nothing but mundane, everyday topics.

And look, your take on the state of the Philosophy board is just that: your take. The underlying issues there run much deeper than you’re willing to see. Don't judge others, and they won't judge you.

If your goal is to drive away the leftists because you think they aren't "spiritual" enough, you might want to consider that people experience spirituality, intelligence, and beauty in vastly different ways. This is an open forum; we can all post wherever we please. Or are we supposed to ask the moderators for permission first to prove we're "qualified" enough to speak? 🤔

You certainly made quite an entrance, though. 👍

casualtiger2 said:Look, people can't possibly read everything posted here.
The current title works fine for me, and there are a few reasons why.
1. My (more experienced) fellow moderator changed it.
2. I don't have any personal experience with drugs—and honestly, I'm not a big fan of using them for spiritual purposes (maybe in extreme cases, during specific developmental stages, under strict supervision, and for very select individuals)
3. It's good that this topic exists and that we're discussing it, but don't expect me to be particularly sympathetic—the damage people suffer is just too high (I've seen it firsthand in my own circle) for me to easily buy into the whole "using drugs for spiritual growth" idea—especially since some teenagers probably read this forum too.
4. In my view, there are no shortcuts on the spiritual path, and drugs aren't going to help you get there.

The title stays.

Because of these perspectives—particularly that last sentence—this PDF could truly live up to its title. I suspect many more users here will start contributing higher-quality content to this thread because of it.
I haven't been registered on this forum very long, so I'm not entirely sure what your previous posting style was like, but I think and hope you'll step up as a decent moderator based on how you've started out. Good luck! 🙂

Things finally started looking up today...🙂

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zlY-J...eature=related

Dear Sasha,

Do you actually take all this advice from the self-proclaimed "professors" and "experts" on here? Honestly, who could buy into any of it? 😂 If we wrote a screenplay based on some of the nonsense posted in this thread, we'd have enough material for at least 50 psychological thrillers.

All joking aside, your warning is spot on. People love to play authority, and the naive among us—and let’s be honest, we’ve all been there, as you mentioned—tend to believe them simply because they're desperate for answers. 👍

Best,

steeleagle2 said:Best regards.

1. The Quran is the word of God, and as such, it acts upon the human soul regardless of whether the person understands the literal words being spoken. That’s the short version.
Let me give you an example...

There was once an old woman who recited (memorized) a specific Quranic verse in her prayers her entire life without knowing the translation. One day, a young, learned man came to her and translated that verse for her at her request. The old woman looked at him and said, "...that is exactly how I have always experienced it..."

2. The famous phrase "Enel Hakk" wasn't uttered by Rumi, but by Hallaj, which is why he
was executed. He was killed because he violated the Sharia laws as understood by the people of that era. The situation hasn't changed much today, at least regarding those extreme (which, in my view, are positively extreme) interpretations of faith; those levels of realization remain hidden. Quite simply, they aren't destined for paradise and have no affirmative impact on the progress of Islamic thought within the realm of religious law.

3. I am trying.😉
The moth burning in the flame is an allegory for "submerging oneself into the Divine Being, into which nothing else can enter except Him." Just as the moth is drawn to the light and rushes toward it, regardless of the fact that it will vanish within that light...

Wine symbolizes intoxication with divine love (ashq), while the tavern keeper is merely the vessel.

I'm not sure who labeled those poems as blasphemy? It could only be the "Wahhabis."

Generally speaking, Sufi "poems" are saturated with symbols because that is the only way to express the inexpressible—the realm of spirit and soul where the brain is stunned and the tongue is tied. Symbols exist to provide a glimpse of a vision that cannot be described with mere words.
One of the greats of Islamic thought who managed to describe the landscapes the human soul traverses on its path toward perfection using philosophical language is Ibn Arabi, the renowned Andalusian "philosopher." I put him in quotes because he wasn't a philosopher per se; he was simply capable of expressing himself with philosophical quality. If you come across his works, I recommend reading them, though if you enjoyed the Sufi odes to God, Ibn Arabi might not be your cup of tea, because philosophy itself is a bird without wings, and you cannot fly with it.

Greetings to you as well.

My first question was aimed at this: if ordinary people can feel God's message in their souls (regardless of language comprehension), why did you say that God grants interpretation only through certain "elites"? Some individuals have certainly reached higher spiritual levels than the average person, but that doesn't mean everyone else only understands God's message if these spiritual leaders explain it to them.

And what would I write if I wrote about Rumi? 🙈 I'm currently reading Rumi, so I drifted toward him. I was actually thinking of Hallaj. I want to believe that Hallaj met the end described in Karahasanov's novel "Eastern Diwan." Could you clarify this part: that true insights of that magnitude remain hidden. They are kept away simply because such views aren't "heavenly" enough and they don't offer any constructive progress to Islamic thought within the realm of religious law.

When I mentioned blasphemy, I was referring to laypeople who don't understand Sufi symbolism—to them, most of these poems sound sacrilegious. Meanwhile, believers can always fall back on that verse stating that Allah did not teach the Prophet poetry, nor is it appropriate for him.

You're spot on about Ibn Arabi—I struggled to connect with his writings when I first picked them up a few years back. My soul just craves that sense of flight.😉

Jerry Green59 said:

Sean Cruz As specified by:
Pantheism. It’s one of those heavy concepts that people love to toss around at cocktail parties when they want to sound profound without actually having to commit to a specific doctrine. At its core, it's the idea that the universe and God aren't two separate things, but rather one and the same—that the divine is woven into every atom, every leaf, and every overpriced latte we consume. It’s a tidy little way to feel connected to the cosmos without the baggage of organized religion, though I suspect some might find it a bit too convenient. Still, there is a certain quiet logic to it. If everything is part of the divine, then even my questionable decision-making is technically part of a grand, cosmic design. That’s a comforting thought, isn't it? It doesn't align with any of the monotheistic religions, to be honest. That’s essentially just spiritual atheism.

Could you clarify? I'm not quite following.

Sean Cruz As I was saying:
@ David: I just caught your comment. If you find yourself revisiting this thread, would you mind answering a few questions for me?

The moderators have sent David some rather subtle hints that he isn't exactly welcome in this discussion.

Pantheism essentially rejects the traditional concept of God. The idea that everything—the entire universe—is God, and that we ourselves are part of that divinity, would be considered blasphemy under any standard monotheistic framework. On the other hand, spirituality doesn't necessarily have to be religious. We all strive to grasp the meaning of our existence; pantheists simply find that meaning in the world around them and within themselves. However, their perspective doesn't align with conventional religious definitions of God. In fact, they often avoid using the word "God" altogether. That’s why I used the term "spiritual atheism."

P.S. To me, Kastanedina suggests that every individual carries the truth deep within their subconscious. Yet, because this realization can feel so overwhelming and leave one feeling helpless, people fight to keep it buried where it belongs—it's worth its weight in gold. Even Jesus said—know the truth, and it will set you free.

Ethan Kim4 said:But what about pantheists, deists, or cult members? Or Agnosticism, which isn't quite the same thing as atheism?
Besides, Christians could technically fall under "polytheists" since they believe in three gods, right?😁

I mentioned at the start that my critique of the film was strictly from a linguistic standpoint. I’m not here to act as an interpreter for Islam as a religion; I’m analyzing the language itself. What bothered me during the screening was how poorly the language of the Bible was interpreted, which is why I brought up the various translations.
As for your other points, here is my take:
Pantheism may have roots in Christianity, but it doesn't support the kind of morality that is central to any monotheistic faith—pantheism doesn't align with monotheism at all; it’s essentially spiritual atheism. Deism is grounded in science, yet we know that no monotheistic religion is based on science; they rely on faith without empirical proof (there is no scientific evidence for the existence of God). Agnosticism doesn't deny God, but it doesn't acknowledge Him either. You could call it a form of skepticism, and from what I understand, skepticism isn't exactly embraced by monotheistic religions.
Christianity is a monotheistic religion—Islam recognizes Jesus as one of the "messengers," so I don't see the issue there. As for religious fanatics and nationalists, their opinions don't carry weight with me. They just spread hate, whereas the fundamental principle of any true faith should be love, not hatred.

@ David: I just saw your comment. If you revisit this thread, I’d appreciate it if you could answer a few questions:
1. How do Muslims recite their prayers in Arabic when most of them don't actually understand what they are saying? Don't they need one of those "interpreters" to enlighten them? From what I understand regarding prayer interpretation, it is recommended to pray in Arabic specifically because the language is so unique, ensuring there is no "confusion."
2. Why were the followers of Rumi killed because they thought he was equating himself with God, when he was simply in a trance when he uttered "Enel hakk"?
3. How do you interpret famous poets who wrote in Persian (like Omar Khayyam), whose poems sound blasphemous to some but are actually odes to God? Some of them are quite literally the most beautiful verses ever written.
If you truly represent what you claim to be, David, then you ought to understand the symbolism behind the moth burning in the flame, the wine, and the tavern keeper.

Quincy:

=Nikolajevna;14038451]Kudos to you. Honestly, I doubt I could be that indifferent about it if I were in your shoes.

It’s just years of hardening myself.😁 I wasn't always this way—quite the opposite, actually. These days, very little truly gets under my skin. Unless it involves people I actually care about, everyone else is basically just background noise to me.

Quincy:

I have my doubts about this whole hatred thing. Why would anyone hate you? Sure, it can happen even when you haven't done anything wrong, but it shouldn't be a rule that there's always someone out to get you; in fact, it's pretty rare.

Maybe "hatred" is too strong a word, but I've personally dealt with people genuinely hating me on two or three separate occasions, despite doing absolutely nothing to them. I've never quite wrapped my head around the phenomenon of being hated for no reason at all. Then again, there's another type of hatred, but that's a different conversation entirely (like why they bombed my hometown and killed innocent people for four straight years—is that not hatred?).

So, what’s the real issue here?😕 I know for a fact there are people at my job who would love nothing more than to see me six feet under, but honestly? I couldn't care less about them...😁.
It's actually quite simple: there will always be people who root for you and people who want to see you fail—that's just life. You just have to learn to accept it and move on.🙂

Brenda Cook4 said:So, Sister, just to make sure I follow—is your main gripe that the director took some liberties with the Quran and didn't quite get the translation right?

If that’s the case, it would be incredibly helpful if you could post both the version used in the movie and your own translation side-by-side.

Here is a link explaining the various meanings behind the word *fitna*: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fitna_%28word%29
The Arabic language is highly nuanced and resists literal interpretation. Honestly, even my own translations might not be perfect because some words simply don't have direct English equivalents. Furthermore, certain phrases used in everyday speech carry one meaning, while their significance within the context of the Quran is entirely different. For instance, "as-salamu alaykum" functions as a standard greeting like "good day," but its deeper religious meaning translates to "Peace be upon you."
Even a single misplaced vowel marker can completely alter a word's meaning. Of course, this doesn't excuse extremists for twisting the Quran to suit their agendas, but you have to realize how many people lack formal education in the language; standard Arabic is primarily the domain of intellectuals. Most others rely on regional dialects—for context, there are about 36 different dialects just in Iraq. This linguistic gap creates a massive opening for those spreading hate to manipulate the message.

First off, I’ve watched the film. In my opinion, the director is doing exactly what Muslim extremists do: cherry-picking verses from the Quran to suit a specific narrative. To set the record straight, I’ll provide the correct translations for the sections the filmmaker took out of context:

Quran, Women – verse 56: Those who disbelieve in Our signs—We will surely cast them into the Fire. Whenever their skins are roasted through, We will replace them with other skins so they may taste the torment. God is truly Powerful and Wise.
My take: This is specifically addressing disbelievers, not followers of other faiths.
Quran, Women – verse 89: They wish you would turn into disbelievers just as they did, so that you would be alike. So do not take them as allies until they emigrate for the cause of God. But if they turn away, seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and do not take any of them as allies or helpers.
Again, this refers to disbelievers (atheists) or polytheists. However, the very next verse clarifies things—verse 90: except for those who seek refuge with a people with whom you have a treaty, or who come to you while they themselves are in difficulty fighting against their own people or fighting against you. If they grant you peace, then God gives you no right against them.
I won't list more; I think this is plenty to make the point.
Furthermore, no major religion supports homosexuality, so I fail to see why that was even brought up.
To wrap this up: yes, Muslim extremists are dangerous, but they aren't any more dangerous than certain Mexican nationalist movements (where religious ideology has been used to justify attempts at territorial expansion and ethnic cleansing).
One last thing:

A man of standing once asked Jesus:
Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?
Jesus answered him:
Why do you call me good?
No one is good except God alone.

Gospel according to Luke, 18, 18-19

swiftcobra15 said:I was looking over this thread yesterday, but I haven't had a spare moment to reply until now. You hit the nail on the head regarding the interpretation of the Quran. I actually wanted to translate and clarify some of the specific word meanings—since I'm fairly competent in that area. I’m certain those translations don't actually align with how they're being interpreted, but I need to double-check everything first. Once I do, I'll jump back in with the correct explanations. 👍

I was looking over this thread yesterday, but I haven't had a spare moment to reply until now. You hit the nail on the head regarding the interpretation of the Quran. I actually wanted to translate and clarify some of the specific word meanings—since I'm fairly competent in that area. I’m certain those translations don't actually align with how they're being interpreted, but I need to double-check everything first. Once I do, I'll jump back in with the correct explanations. 👍
I noticed this same discussion is happening over on the "religion" board as well. There's actually a movie out there with English subtitles covering this.
I noticed this same discussion is happening over on the "religion" board as well. There's actually a movie out there with English subtitles covering this.
I was actually referring to translations from Arabic. Having a grasp of both Arabic and English, I can tell you that many of those English interpretations aren't quite hitting the mark compared to the original language.

swiftcobra15 said:I watched a little over half the movie, and honestly, I think I've seen enough.
Quotes can be incredibly brutal, but you'd find even darker stuff in the Old Testament.
So, if we’re taking things literally, both the Bible and the Quran could easily serve
as blueprints for the worst kinds of crimes. It all comes down to how you interpret them, though.

Ultimately, my take is that the film isn't attacking Islam itself, but rather those twisted interpretations of the Quran.

Long story short, I don't think the film is attacking Islam itself, but rather a twisted interpretation of the Quran.
I was looking over this thread yesterday, but I haven't had a spare moment to reply until now. You hit the nail on the head regarding the interpretation of the Quran. I actually wanted to translate and clarify some of the specific word meanings—since I'm fairly competent in that area. I’m certain those translations don't actually align with how they're being interpreted, but I need to double-check everything first. Once I do, I'll jump back in with the correct explanations. 👍

Sandra Parker3 said:I couldn't really get my point across last night because the forum was acting up again, but honestly, Norris hit the nail on the head.
I’m especially glad she brought up professional ethics—you're supposed to actually work at your job, not suffocate everyone with messy relationship drama and TMI personal details.

I just have one more thing to add. To the people here claiming they're victims of workplace bullying: by what right? You pick and choose who you play the victim with, but the moment you run into someone doing the exact same thing to you, suddenly you're being harassed? I truly hope none of you ever have to experience that, but take my word for it: this isn't what you think it is.

(I have friends from various old jobs that I've stayed close with, but I have NEVER, and I mean never, shared private business in front of others. There's a time and place for that—grab a coffee after hours, go out for pizza... something. If you have this desperate need to vent or confide in someone, do it somewhere else. It's always your choice who you trust, and as adults, you should be able to judge that pretty well. And if you mess up? Well, just don't do it at the office.)

It seems you missed the point of my story entirely. I wasn't saying a female colleague was bullying me—it was a male colleague. She was just a jerk. And believe me, I wouldn't wish sexual harassment or psychological abuse on my worst enemy, especially the kind where they try to systematically degrade you in front of everyone just because you won't comply.
I'm glad some people have had positive experiences; I have too, but only with one female colleague at my firm with whom I don't share direct responsibilities. Honestly, I think that's the only way it works. People can be cutthroat when they're competing for the same status or resources. I wish you all the best and some common sense 😉!

That’s exactly my point—I was ready to move across the country for her at a moment's notice. I basically viewed her as my younger sister; I’d just head off on vacation and come back to find 😱 a completely different person. Now, we actually work together, though I happen to be her boss.

Anyway, let's take this to private messages.

Andrew Reed11 said:😉 Look, it’s pretty simple—you have to maintain certain boundaries with the people you work with. You can't just hand over personal information that could be used against you later. I learned this the hard way at an old job when I kept venting about my messy relationship to everyone. By the end, I was seen as that person who just complains all day instead of actually focusing on their tasks. Obviously, my coworkers weren't thrilled about listening to my drama, though I didn't realize it at the time. When you feel that urge to spill your guts, it's better off writing in a journal, posting on a forum, or sending an email to a friend. Anything is better than dumping your problems on colleagues. You need to draw a hard line there—otherwise, you're either going to become a target for workplace harassment or worse, you might even lose your job.

I've actually been a victim of workplace bullying myself. I dealt with a "colleague" who spent two years playing the martyr, only to exploit a coworker's harassment situation to climb the ladder and then try to stab me in the back. Fortunately, she failed 😍.
Bdw - I love your username - is that just a handle, or are you actually a professor? I happen to be a professor myself 🙂

I couldn't agree more. To me, getting too close is just asking for trouble. As the old saying goes: business is business, and friendship is friendship. 👍